Although the recipes may be good (I haven't tried them yet), the "flavor" of UGA football is totally missing - my copy seems to be a Georgia cover over an Ole Miss book - there is a nice description of the Ole Miss campus in the forward, and even a "Ole Miss Gingersnaps" recipe, but NOTHING about GEORGIA !?!

A big disappointment for a UGA alumni. :-(

This is a nice book with some good recipes for tailgating. The best hamburger I ever tasted came from this book! Remember, watching the game is only half the fun.

sorry may englis is not good

This book has a slightly deceptive title: the period discussed is larger (as it includes the late archaic as well, 530-480, seen as the pinnacle of the 'art' of Athenian vase-painting) and it is mainly limited to the red-figure technique. It has been written by an very knowledgeable scholar, who has at close hand witnessed the development of the study of vase-painting over the last half century and who has managed to keep an open mind. This results in a highly readable account of the development of this important witness to the painting and drawing skills of this important period, which defined the way we see 'classical'.
The open mind results in the incorporation and open yet critical assessment of many of the latest insights, such as the chronological debate initiated by Vickers and Francis. Nowhere one gets the impression the author is copying a text he hasn't carefully considered himself, and his criticism is always careful and constructive.
Some criticism could be made as regards the scope of the study: matters like use, trade, production or the lesser painters get little or no attention. This is a conscious choice of the author, as expressed in the title ('art'); many in archaeology may find this an outdated approach. As long as there are 300 pages packed with useful information I'm not complaining.
Another point of criticism could be the lack of clear dates. In my view, the framework of red-figure vasepainting, also through studies like Oakley's Phiale Painter and Achilles Painter and the work of Lezzi-Hafter on the Eretria Painter and the Shuvalov Painter, to mention only two prominent scholars, makes it possible to date nearly any red-figure vase within 10 years. Robertson consciously avoids this, which is a pity because it clarifies chronological relations between different painters. But this is a minor point.
For specialists in the field (to whom I reckon myself) it is a helpful overview, for the beginner it may be slightly overwhelming. Illustrations, although there are 300 of them, do not sufficiently illuminate the wealth of the material and the book is best enjoyed alongside, or after reading Boardman's lavishly illustrated histories of Attic Red Figure in the Thames and Hudson series.

Scott Gordon's Controlling the State combines under one cover two distinct realms of discourse. One realm is the intellectual history of conceptual formulations about the constitutional control of government, when that control operates through the organizational structure of government. Two of the book's nine chapters treat these conceptual issues, though many of the other chapters present such material as well. The other realm is the actual conduct of government in several historical episodes that illustrate the author's theme. These episodes are treated in seven chapters-on Athens, Rome, Venice, Holland, Great Britain (with separate chapters on the seventeenth century and contemporary times), and the United States. The chapter on Athens, for example, emphasizes not democracy and majority rule, but "that the institutional structure of Athenian government was the first major polity in history to have a nonhierarchical system of plural and mutually controlling authorities" (p. 77)...

...Gordon does not dispute that states may possess sovereignty, only that they must. He argues that polities may be either hierarchical or polycentric (p. 16). Sovereignty exists in the hierarchical polity but not in the polycentric polity, which has no locus of ultimate authority but rather a number of nonsovereign authorities that check and balance each other. He describes this polycentric vision as the countervalence model...

...A concern with the control of government, Gordon argues, must adopt polyarchy and not hierarchy for its analytical orientation. If the state is hierarchical, it cannot be controlled outside of the optimizing calculus of the holder of sovereign authority. For the state to be controlled beyond this optimizing calculus, political authority must be splintered and diffused among independent parties. Governance then comes to operate ultimately not through the commands or acquiescence of the sovereign but through a concurrence among multiple, independent sources of authority...

...Although the orientation of Gordon's Controlling the State lies generally in a fruitful direction, overall the book disappoints me. Interesting bits appear here and there, including a number of citations that seem worth pursuing, yet when I close the book and ask how I must now rearrange my intellectual furniture, I have no answer. I find no conceptual formulations that I can bring to bear in illuminating one issue or another. The case studies are predictable and do not contain surprising formulations that arrest my attention. Nothing in the book leaves me feeling chagrined at not having thought of it first or so enthusiastic as to exclaim "that's truly interesting, now I understand!" The book's analytical framework is rudimentary and nonsystematic. For one thing, Gordon apparently made no effort to assimilate any of the recent scholarship on the emergent properties of decentralized orders. Yet these formulations, in which the outcomes of a process are not direct objects of anyone's optimizing choices, are surely relevant to the material at hand. Among other things, this literature challenges Gordon's foundational presumption that there is a choice between hierarchy and polyarchy with respect to social organization. Susanne Lohmann has in progress some fascinating work on universities as polyarchical, which stands in sharp contrast to Gordon's claim that universities are among the many modern organizations that are hierarchical (p. 16). In Alienation and the Soviet Economy (Oakland, Calif.: The Independent Institute, 1990), Paul Craig Roberts argues that central planing is never an option to markets and that the Soviet Union was simply "a polycentric system with signals that are irrational from the standpoint of economic efficiency" (pp. 76-77). In short, someone interested in exploring how ideas about polycentricity can be brought to bear on the constitution of governance will have to look outside of Gordon's Controlling the State...

I'm in the middle of the book in the chapter on the Roman republic. I find it valuable as an undergrad developing an interest in law, because it exposes me to constitutionalism as a highly-varied concept throughout history. Constitutionalism is much more than an American document and the legal and philosophical battles produced by it. That will be my over-arching lesson learned from this book.

The introductory chapters on constitutional theory and sovereignty are, in and of themselves, valuable. Instructive footnotes too, without being oppressive.

It's a nice book,interesting,but not that specialized... It's comments are realy interesting and accurate,but the best in that book is it's "Literatur-Verzeichnis".It's really helpfull for those who want to find out more about the subjects they're searching for..

A healthy source of non fictionally based stories. Usefull for those who wish to learn what the book writes about. Understandable and easy to read. Good show.

MapBlast contends that the journey between Athens and Berlin is 1601 miles and 28 hours by car. I promise that the automotive journey will be less tedious and tiresome than your voyage Between Athens and Berlin with David H. Kelsey.

The book reviews and condenses several articles and books. Each posits a unique view of the nature of theological education. By critically reviewing these works and relating them to one another, Kelsey seeks an answer to the question of what comprises excellent theological education. He considers these works under two rubrics. The Athens/Berlin dichotomy is primary. Secondary is the tension between unity and pluralism within theological schools.

First, the style of writing is awkward, stilted, and artificial. You will stop in the midst of many a paragraph and wonder whether your journey has taken a wrong turn somewhere in the Balkan states. Second, the reviews do not present any coherent view of their subject. To understand Kelsey you will need to read each of the books and articles he discusses for yourself. Finally, the most frustrating aspect of reading this book is the suspicion that Kelsey really does have something profound to say, if only he can learn how to say it.

The Parthenon, built by the Athenians in the mid-5th century B.C.E., is widely considered to be the most important architectural achievement of the ancient world. Susan Woodford has managed to capture the building's history in just 48 pages, detailing the historical and social context of its creation, a basic description of its architectural structure, and the history of the monument through the present day. The work is concise, well-illustrated, and perfectly suited to non-specialists interested in understanding the building without learning precise details of history or architecture.

In fact, one problem with the book is that it seems to assume that the reader does not want to learn anything more about the subject. The lack of bibliography is incredibly disappointing, especially since the book gives only a sketch of the subject. The reader interested in further pursuing the subject will be forced to seek out sources on her own.

The real trouble with this book, though, is the price. At [$$.$$] for only 48 pages (about [$$] cents a page!), the depth of your pocketbook begins to become a factor in the decision. Though the book is of a high quality, the price will be prohibitive for many potential readers. There are few general introductions to the Parthenon, however (so far as an Amazon search reveals), and so anyone truly interested may be left without a choice.

This is not as bad as one would expect given the general awfulness of Simon Goldhill's oeuvre. However, the sections authored by him so degrade and debase the book that the otherwise useful chapters it contains are debased by the presence of its co-editor. Readers would be advised to skip Goldhill's parts or even, as I did, physically remove them from the tome. Given that he is so utterly devoid of anything vaguely resembling talent, one can only wonder why on earth the man goes on. And on. And on...

By now it should be abundantly obvious to everyone that a strongly biased political viewpoint is guaranteed not to produce reliable histories and historians. This book is one of many cases which prove the point.

One would especially expect intellectuals to understand this. They have spent their lives reading books and dealing with ideas, and so they should know about viewing the past with a pair of politically-colored spectacles perched on one's nose. It produces fantasy-history, such as Tacitus' descriptions of the barbarians in "Germania" (a place he never visited).

The most obvious stupidity on display in this book is that ancient Rome was much more about "the cult of the phallus" than ancient Greece. Check out Craig Williams' "Roman Homosexuality" for the details. The Romans admired large dicks, and even worshipped them. They were encouraged to have promiscuous insertive sex with all males and females -- as long as the selected partners were slaves & prostitutes.

The ironic point is that the Greeks did NOT admire the large penis! Au contraire! "Well-endowed" was not a Greek term of praise; it was reserved for satyrs and low-life clowns. The Greeks thought that a small member was best, and that sex in moderation was best. In contradistinction to the Romans, the Greeks only admired homosexual relations which were consenting and took place between free citizens, in the one-on-one educational role known as pederasty (paiderasteia).

The phallus was openly displayed on the Greek Herms, as a boundary-marker, but there was nothing like the public veneration of the phallus found among the Romans.

If a book can be said to have a dual personality, Reign of the Phallus is it. The author, who has a vast knowledge of Greek pottery and who keenly analizes it, reveals interesting and penetrating aspects of classical Athens. She describes a society in which women are secluded wives or common prostitutes, with little in between. She describes men who are violent and dominating in their sexual relationships with both women and other men. She butresses her arguments with plentiful data and a massive number of pottery illustrations. However, she consistently reveals her biases as she presumes conclusions and then gathers evidence to support them. Several of her arguments are anachronistic -- sometimes by centuries! The author's greatest failing is to interpret images to fit her theses -- calling attention to many images and declaring them supportive, but dismissing images that are contrary to her theses. The text would be a good tool for a freshman college expository class, where it could be used to illustrate inconsistencies, unsupported assertations, and selective evidence. In spite of the author's political agenda, Reign of the Phallus can be rewarding for readers willing to sift through the assumptions and biases that structure the book. It provides a view into classical Athenian society revealed by the symbols and icons and stylized structure of its pottery. After finishing the book, I felt that the author gave me a look into classical Greeece, but who then went overboard in pushing her portrait of men who were opressive and violent in all their relationships, expecially sexual ones. The book was a lot of work.

Judging from Greek mythology and art, the Ancient Greek appear to be obsessed with sex - but why? The author does a good job of explaining this obsession in terms of literature, art, and history. By understanding the suppression of women in Greek culture, one is able to understand many taboo aspects of Greek culture. The author states that museum's have censored many works of art due to the pornographic themes, and as a result Modern society has been misguided.

Although I did not agree with the authors interruption of every piece of art in the book, I did find the subject of female and male prostitution 'interesting'. It was also 'interesting' to learn what the Ancients Greeks considered beautiful in terms of male and female sexuality, and why the Greek's altered the size of certain body parts in art. Needless to say , I found this book interesting and very entertaining; however, I would only recommend it to a mature audience.

i thought this book was stupid and kinda confusing... its a play and they do a play within a play, um no its just not gonna work out. its a stupid book because there are 3 worlds, none that would ever really be around, and faries are just no longer popular. so if shakesphere was actually a good writer then sure, but this book is just weird.